Arkhios
2017-09-27, 12:07 AM
Another thread in 5th edition forum made me think about gestalts and how could characters like that be made relatively balanced - if not with standard multiclassed or single classed characters, then at least between themselves.
There is a huge implication with implementing the Gestalt system as is from earlier editions to 5th edition without pruning it out a bit, most importantly regarding saving throw proficiencies.
If you were to allow the gestalt character to choose any saving throw proficiencies from the combined classes, the core design of those would be flung out of the window immediately. "Gestalt As Is", this would mean that you could choose two good saves, and no poor saves. This rings so wrong from balance point of view.
This led me to wrap up a balanced option while still trying to keep the general feel of gestalt.
Here are the thoughts I had about it:
Saving Throw Proficiencies are chosen from those available to combined classes so that you have one good and one poor save (e.g. paladin+sorcerer could have either con+cha or wis+cha, not con+wis)
Hit dice per level are the lower of the two classes. A barbarian+sorcerer would then have d6 hit dice, for example. Considering that you still get all other benefits from both classes, this feels fair, even though it might seem harsh at first. Alternatively, I suppose you could have the average of the two, rounded down to the nearest hit die (that way, barbarian+sorcerer would have a d8 hit die).
Equipment proficiencies are gained as if you had multiclassed between the two classes, so that you only get the proficiencies as seen in the multiclassing proficiencies table. Weapon proficiencies are gained as normal. If the classes have different spellcasting foci, you can choose one or the other, not both. However, the chosen foci work with all spells from your classes.
Class features that improve by level (e.g. Ki points, sorcery points, wild shape, lay on hands, spellcasting/pact magic) would all improve at half the normal pace. For example, a monk+sorcerer could have up to 10 ki points and 10 sorcery points at 20th level, or a paladin+sorcerer would be considered a 15th level spellcaster at 20th level, with spells of a 10th level paladin and 10th level sorcerer).
This list led me to wonder if these guidelines could be used to come up with general rules for designing "hybrid" classes from the existing ones; such as barbarian+bard (valor) which feels quite thematic combination. Of course this would mean that spellcasting rules would have to be revised so that two full-caster classes combined wouldn't feel shafted with their full progression in spell levels to cut in half. Any opinions?
Edit: it just occurred to me that many readers might not be aware of what a gestalt is, or used to be in 3.5 d&d (the latest).
Essentially a character that advanced fully in two classes at the same time with a few exceptions:
Higher of the two classes' hit dice (not both), higher of the base save progressions (each), all armor and weapon proficiencies of both classes, higher of the amount of skills (class skill lists combined).
There is a huge implication with implementing the Gestalt system as is from earlier editions to 5th edition without pruning it out a bit, most importantly regarding saving throw proficiencies.
If you were to allow the gestalt character to choose any saving throw proficiencies from the combined classes, the core design of those would be flung out of the window immediately. "Gestalt As Is", this would mean that you could choose two good saves, and no poor saves. This rings so wrong from balance point of view.
This led me to wrap up a balanced option while still trying to keep the general feel of gestalt.
Here are the thoughts I had about it:
Saving Throw Proficiencies are chosen from those available to combined classes so that you have one good and one poor save (e.g. paladin+sorcerer could have either con+cha or wis+cha, not con+wis)
Hit dice per level are the lower of the two classes. A barbarian+sorcerer would then have d6 hit dice, for example. Considering that you still get all other benefits from both classes, this feels fair, even though it might seem harsh at first. Alternatively, I suppose you could have the average of the two, rounded down to the nearest hit die (that way, barbarian+sorcerer would have a d8 hit die).
Equipment proficiencies are gained as if you had multiclassed between the two classes, so that you only get the proficiencies as seen in the multiclassing proficiencies table. Weapon proficiencies are gained as normal. If the classes have different spellcasting foci, you can choose one or the other, not both. However, the chosen foci work with all spells from your classes.
Class features that improve by level (e.g. Ki points, sorcery points, wild shape, lay on hands, spellcasting/pact magic) would all improve at half the normal pace. For example, a monk+sorcerer could have up to 10 ki points and 10 sorcery points at 20th level, or a paladin+sorcerer would be considered a 15th level spellcaster at 20th level, with spells of a 10th level paladin and 10th level sorcerer).
This list led me to wonder if these guidelines could be used to come up with general rules for designing "hybrid" classes from the existing ones; such as barbarian+bard (valor) which feels quite thematic combination. Of course this would mean that spellcasting rules would have to be revised so that two full-caster classes combined wouldn't feel shafted with their full progression in spell levels to cut in half. Any opinions?
Edit: it just occurred to me that many readers might not be aware of what a gestalt is, or used to be in 3.5 d&d (the latest).
Essentially a character that advanced fully in two classes at the same time with a few exceptions:
Higher of the two classes' hit dice (not both), higher of the base save progressions (each), all armor and weapon proficiencies of both classes, higher of the amount of skills (class skill lists combined).